Synthesis and Antimalarial Activity of Mallatojaponin C and Related

Brexit storm clouds darken. Ongoing failure of the European Union and the U.K. to strike a trade deal ahead of the U.K.'s exit from... POLICY CONCE...
0 downloads 0 Views 404KB Size
Download PDF
Article pubs.acs.org/jnp

Synthesis and Antimalarial Activity of Mallatojaponin C and Related Compounds Alexander L. Eaton,† Seema Dalal,‡ M. Belen Cassera,‡ Shuqi Zhao,† and David G. I. Kingston*,† †

Department of Chemistry and the Virginia Tech Center for Drug Discovery and ‡Department of Biochemistry and the Virginia Tech Center for Drug Discovery, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, United States S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: The phloroglucinol mallotojaponin C (1) from Mallotus oppositifolius, which was previously shown by us to have both antiplasmodial and cytocidal activities against the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum, was synthesized in three steps from 2′,4′,6′-trihydroxyacetophenone, and various derivatives were synthesized in an attempt to improve the bioactivity of this class of compounds. Two derivatives, the simple prenylated phloroglucinols 12 and 13, were found to have comparable antiplasmodial activities to that of mallotojaponin C. he phloroglucinol mallotojaponin C (1) was first isolated from Mallotus oppositifolius Muell. Arg., a member of the Euphorbiaceae family,2 and was shown to have both cytostatic and cytocidal activity against the chloroquine/mefloquineresistant Dd2 strain of Plasmodium falciparum. The related compounds methylated mallotojaponin C (2), mallotophenone (3), and mallotojaponin B (4) were also obtained, but had less potent antimalarial activity than 1, indicating the importance of the alkenyl side chain and the phenolic hydroxy substituents at C-2 and C-6 for antiplasmodial activity. Many monomeric phloroglucinols have been investigated for their antimalarial activity,3−5 and some additional dimeric compounds from M. oppositifolius have recently been shown to have trypanocidal and antileishmanial activities.6 This paper describes the syntheses and biological evaluations of mallotojaponin C and various derivatives that were reported in 2015 in a Ph.D. dissertation7 and complements the results in an excellent recent paper by Cariou and Dubois et al.8

T

alkenyl halide in 80% aqueous ethanol at room temperature; the solvent was chosen based on a previous study of the effect of solvent on the C-alkylation of phloroglucinols and on trials of various solvents for the synthesis of 11.9,10 The use of sodium hydroxide led to higher yields of 11, 12, 16, and 17 than the use of lithium hydroxide. Compounds 11,8,11−14 16,14−17 17,18,19 and 1817,20 have previously been synthesized, and their structures were confirmed by MS and by comparison of their 1H and 13C NMR spectra with previously published spectra. Thus, treatment of 10 with 3,3-dimethylallyl bromide (prenyl bromide) in 80% aqueous ethanol with 1.1 equiv of NaOH at room temperature for 16 h gave the monoprenylated product 11 in 33% yield. Alkylation of 10 with geranyl bromide and farnesyl bromide under the same conditions yielded the corresponding geranylated and farnesylated products 12 and 13, with the yields decreasing with increasing chain length. Purification of the final product was carried out in each case by reversed-phase chromatography over C18-silica gel. Purification of 11 over silica gel in the presence of 0.1% formic acid yielded the hydroxylated product 14. Alkylation of 15 with prenyl, geranyl, and farnesyl bromides gave the alkylated derivatives 16−18 in low to moderate yields. The synthesis of dimeric phloroglucinols such as mallatojaponin C (1) required the coupling of the monomeric

■

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Synthesis of Mallatojaponin C and Analogues. The prenylated monomeric phloroglucinols 11−14 and 16−18 (Scheme 1) were synthesized by prenylation of either 2,4,6trihydroxyacetophenone (15) or 2,6-dihydroxy-4-methoxyacetophenone (10) (Scheme 1). Prenylation of the precursors 10 and 15 was achieved by reaction of the phenol with either sodium hydroxide or lithium hydroxide and the appropriate © XXXX American Chemical Society and American Society of Pharmacognosy

Received: April 19, 2016

A

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b00347 J. Nat. Prod. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Natural Products

Article

Figure 1. Structures of mallatojapinin C (1), tetramethylmallatojapinin C (2), mallotophenone (3), and mallotojaponin B (4).

Scheme 1. Synthesis of Alkylated Phloroglucinols 11−18

Scheme 2. Synthesis of Dimeric Phloroglucinol Derivatives

compounds 10−12, 14, and 16−17. The initial coupling conditions used were based upon previous work with similar substrates,21−23 but it was apparent that the alkene moiety was readily hydrated under the standard acidic conditions. Most of the previously published work was on derivatives not containing an alkene moiety, so this problem did not arise in these cases. The coupling conditions were thus optimized by a study of synthetic conditions for compound 8, and various solvents, catalysts, and reaction durations were investigated. The best conditions were found to be the use of acetonitrile as solvent and a small amount of concentrated sulfuric acid as catalyst to reduce hydration of the alkene. These conditions allowed the reaction to be completed in less than 30 min, and this short reaction time also reduced the amount of hydration. Although the reaction yield was low, the desired product could easily be purified. These conditions were then applied to the synthesis of mallatojaponin C (1) and compounds 5−9. The latter compounds were prepared in an attempt to improve upon the antiparasitic activity of the coupled compounds and specifically to investigate the effect of the length of the alkenyl chain and the substituent at C-5 on the bioactivity of the resulting compounds. In the case of the known compound 1 the structure was confirmed by comparison of spectroscopic data with the published data,2 and the structures of the other compounds were established by analysis of their spectroscopic data. The synthesis of other derivatives was attempted by replacing formaldehyde with various aldehydes. The synthesis of the pfluorophenyl derivative 19 initially appeared to be successful, as judged by its 1H NMR spectrum, consistent with its assigned structure, and the compound showed promising bioactivity, with an IC50 value in the 2−4 μM range. Unfortunately, the compound proved to be unstable on storage in the freezer and decomposed before MS data could be obtained and an accurate IC50 value could be determined. Attempts to synthesize other proposed derivatives were unsuccessful, presumably because of the stability of the secondary benzylic carbocation that would be formed in an acid-catalyzed retrocoupling reaction.

Antiplasmodial Activities of Mallatojaponin C Analogues. The synthetic compounds 1−18 were evaluated for their antiplasmodial activities against the Dd2 strain of P. falciparum. The results are presented in Table 1, together with the data for some of the same compounds from the recent Table 1. Antiparasitic Activities of Natural and Synthetic Phloroglucinols and Analogues compound number (this work) 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

IC50 (μM) Dd2 strain 0.64 8.1 1.7 >10 >20 >10 >20 1.7 0.57 0.56 >20 >20 >20 6.6 3.6

± 0.1a ± 0.8 ± 0.8

± 0.4 ± 0.09 ± 0.07

± 2.4 ± 0.8

compound number (ref 8)

IC50 (μM) FcB1/ Columbia strain

2 5a 12 NRb NR NR NR 6 7 NR NR NR NR NR NR

0.75 ± 0.11 17.6 ± 4.3 6 ± 0.4

7.4 ± 1.1 4.4 ± 1.3

a

This value differs from that reported in ref 2. bNR = not reported in ref 8. B

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b00347 J. Nat. Prod. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Natural Products

Article

Cariou and Dubois et al. paper.8 The potencies against the two different strains of P. falciparum show similar trends, but the Dd2 strain is more sensitive to these compounds than the FcB1/Columbia strain. For the dimeric phloroglucinols (1, 5−9), it was found that the prenyl side chain maximized the bioactivity, with the bisprenylated natural product 1 having the best potency. Both the monoprenylated compound 4 and the bisgeranylated compound 6 were less potent than 1 against the Dd2 strain. Methylation at the 4-position is also very important. Thus, the bisgeranyl compound 6, with methylation at both the 4- and 4′hydroxy groups, has an IC50 value of 1.7 ± 0.8 μM, while the corresponding unmethylated compound 8 is much less potent, with an IC50 value greater than 20 μM. This difference may be partly due to polarity, since the hydrated derivative 7 is much less active than the unhydrated natural product 1. The situation is somewhat different with the monomeric phloroglucinol derivatives. With these compounds potency increases as the alkenyl side chain increases in length from prenyl to geranyl to farnesyl in both the 4-methylated series (compounds 11−13) and the unmethylated series (compounds 16−18). As with the dimeric phloroglucinols, the compounds in the 4-methylated series are more potent than those in the unmethylated series, but the differences are smaller. Thus, the unmethylated farnesyl compound 18 is only about 9-fold less potent than its methylated analogue 13. Finally, the excellent potencies of the monomeric compounds 12 and 13 are worth noting. Both compounds show submicromolar activities, with the farnesylated compound 13 having an IC50 value of 0.56 μM against the Dd2 strain, comparable to the dimeric lead compound 1. It is thus conceivable that further explorations in this chemical space could yield relatively simple compounds with significant antiparasitic activities.

■

with MgSO4, and the solvent was removed under reduced pressure. The residue was purified utilizing C18 HPLC (MeOH/H2O gradient with 0.1% formic acid) to yield the alkylated phloroglucinol (11−14, 16−18). Standard Procedure B for Synthesis of Dimeric Phloroglucinol Derivatives 1 and 5−9. The following general procedure was used. The alkylated phloroglucinol (10−12, 14, 16, or 17, 0.1−0.5 mmol) was dissolved in CH3CN. Formaldehyde (37% aqueous, 10 equiv) was added, followed by the addition of concentrated H2SO4 (1 drop). The reaction mixture was stirred for 5 min at rt. The reaction mixture was diluted with water (10 mL) and extracted with EtOAc (3 × 10 mL). The organic solution was washed with saturated NaCl (10 mL) and dried with MgSO4, and the solvent was removed under reduced pressure. The residue was purified utilizing C18 HPLC (MeOH/H2O gradient with 0.1% formic acid) to yield the dimeric phloroglucinol derivatives 1 and 5−9. Antiparasitic Bioassay. This assay was performed at Virginia Tech as previously described.2 Synthesis of 11. Standard procedure A was used with NaOH to convert 10 (495 mg, 2.72 mmol) to 11 (228 mg, 0.91 mmol, 33%). Compound 11: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 215 (4.06), 288 (4.09), 333 (3.36) nm; 1H NMR (MeOH-d4, 400 MHz) δ 1.60 (3H, s, H-5′), 1.71 (3H, s, H-4′), 2.60 (3H, s, −COCH3), 3.15 (2H, d, J = 7.2 Hz, H1′), 3.78 (3H, s, −OCH3), 5.10 (1H, m, H-2′), 5.96 (1H, s, H-5); 13C NMR (MeOH-d4, 100 MHz) δ 17.8, 22.0, 25.9, 33.1, 55.8, 90.9, 106.0, 108.9, 124.3, 131.1, 162.3, 163.5, 165.0, 205.0; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 251.1274 (calcd for C14H19O4+ 251.1278), [M + Na]+ m/z 273.1114 (calcd for C14H18NaO4+ 273.1097). Synthesis of 12. Standard procedure A was used with LiOH as base to convert 10 (150 mg, 0.82 mmol) to 12 (78 mg, 0.25 mmol, 30%). When NaOH was used as base, the yield of 12 from 100 mg (0.55 mmol) of 10 was 37 mg (0.12 mmol, 22%). Compound 12: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 216 (4.16), 289 (4.14), 333 (3.38) nm; 1H NMR (MeOH-d4, 400 MHz) δ 1.60 (3H, s, H10′), 1.67 (3H, s, H-9′), 1.87 (3H, s, H-8′), 2.08 (4H, m, H-4′, H-5′), 2.67 (3H, s, −COCH3), 3.33 (2H, d, J = 7.0 Hz, H-1′), 3.81 (3H, s, −OCH3), 5.06 (1H, m, H-6′), 5.19 (1H, m, H-2′), 6.02 (1H, s, H-5); 13 C NMR (MeOH-d4, 100 MHz) δ 16.2, 17.7, 21.4, 25.7, 26.3, 32.9, 39.7, 55.7, 91.8, 105.4, 121.6, 123.7, 131.9, 163.1, 203.7; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 319.1896 (calcd for C19H27O4+ 319.1904), [M + Na]+ m/z 341.1707 (calcd for C19H26NaO4+ 341.1723). Synthesis of 13. Standard procedure A was used with LiOH as base. The yield of 13 from 100 mg (0.55 mmol) of 10 was 61 mg (0.16 mmol, 29%). Compound 13: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 213 (4.21), 288 (4.14), 333 (3.38) nm; 1H NMR (MeOH-d4, 400 MHz) δ 1.60 (3H, s, H10′), 1.67 (3H, s, H-9′), 1.87 (3H, s, H-8′), 2.08 (4H, m, H-4′, H-5′), 2.67 (3H, s, −COCH3), 3.33 (2H, d, J = 7.0 Hz H-1′), 3.81 (3H, s, −OCH3), 5.06 (1H, m, H-6′), 5.19 (1H, m, H-2′), 6.02 (1H, s, H-5); 13 C NMR (MeOH-d4, 100 MHz) δ 16.2, 17.7, 21.4, 25.7, 26.3, 32.9, 39.7, 55.7, 91.8, 105.4, 121.6, 123.7, 131.9, 163.1, 203.7; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 387.2535 (calcd for C24H35O4+ 387.2530), [M + Na]+ m/z 409.2346 (calcd for C24H34O4Na+ 409.2349). Synthesis of 14. Standard procedure A was used with NaOH as base. The residue was purified by column chromatography on silica gel (9:1 hexanes/EtOAc/0.1% formic acid). The yield of 14 from 49.6 mg (0.27 mmol) of 10 was 24 mg (0.096 mmol, 36%). Compound 14: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 216 (4.03), 290 (4.07), 331 (3.39) nm; 1H NMR (MeOH-d4, 400 MHz) δ 1.37 (6H, s, H-4′, H-5′), 1.77 (2H, t, J = 6.9 Hz, H-3′), 2.53 (2H, t, J = 6.9 Hz, H-2′), 2.58 (3H, s, −COCH3), 3.83 (3H, s, −OCH3), 6.01 (1H, s, H-5); 13C NMR (MeOH-d4, 100 MHz) δ 17.4, 26.9, 32.5, 33.6, 56.2, 77.1, 92.3, 102.1, 107.0, 157.7, 165.2, 166.5, 204.7; HRESIMS [M − OH]+• m/z 251.1278 (calcd for C14H19O4+ 251.1278), [M − C4H9O]+ m/z 195.0646 (calcd for C10H11O4+ 195.0652). Synthesis of 16. Standard procedure A was used with LiOH as base. The yield of 16 from 980 mg (5.8 mmol) of 15 was 365 mg (1.55 mmol, 27%). Compound 16: 1H NMR (MeOH-d4, 400 MHz) δ 1.63 (3H, s, H5′) 1.73 (3H, s, H-4′), 2.60 (3H, s, −COCH3), 3.17 (2H, d, J = 7.2

EXPERIMENTAL SECTION

General Experimental Procedures. Melting points were obtained using a Büchi B-540 melting point apparatus. UV−vis spectra were recorded on a Shimadzu UV-1201 spectrophotometer. NMR spectra were recorded on Varian 400 or Bruker Avance 500 MHz spectrometers. Mass spectra were obtained with an Agilent 6220 LC-TOF-MS. Preparatory HPLC separations were performed using Shimadzu LC-8A pumps coupled with a Shimadzu SPD-M10A diode array detector, a SCL-10A controller, and a Varian Dynamax C18 column (250 × 21.4 mm). Semipreparative HPLC separations were performed using Shimadzu LC-10AT pumps coupled with a Shimadzu SPD-M10A diode array detector, a SCL-10A system controller, and a Phenomenex Luna C18 column (250 × 10 mm). Bioactive compounds were checked for purity by analytical HPLC analysis using Shimadzu LC-10AT pumps coupled with a Shimadzu SPD-M10A diode array detector, a Sedex 75 evaporative light scattering detector, a SCL-10A system controller, and a Phenomenex Luna C18 column (250 × 4.6 mm). Compounds 10 and 15 were purchased from Indofine Chemical Company and tested for bioactivity without further purification. Compounds 2 and 3 were isolated from M. oppositifolius, and compound 4 was previously synthesized from 1.2 Geranyl bromide was purchased from Alfa Aesar, and prenyl and farnesyl bromides were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. Standard Procedure A for Synthesis of Alkylated Phloroglucinols 11−14 and 16−18. The following general procedure was used. Compound 10 or 15 (1 equiv) was dissolved in a solution of 80% EtOH (40 mL) containing LiOH or NaOH (2 equiv). Prenyl, geranyl, or farnesyl bromide (1.1 equiv) was added, and the reaction mixture was stirred for 16 h at rt. The reaction mixture was acidified with 3 N HCl and extracted with CH2Cl2 (3 × 50 mL). The organic solution was washed with saturated aqueous NaCl (50 mL) and dried C

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b00347 J. Nat. Prod. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Natural Products

Article

Hz, H-1′), 5.16 (1H, m, H-2′), 5.89 (1H, s, H-5); 13C NMR (MeOHd4, 100 MHz) δ 17.8, 22.1, 26.0, 32.8, 94.7, 105.5, 107.9, 124.5, 131.1, 161.8, 163.9, 164.8, 204.6; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 237.1119 (calcd for C13H17O4+ 237.1121), [2M + NH4]+ m/z 490.2405 (calcd for C26H36NO8+ 490.2435). Synthesis of 17. Standard procedure A was used. With LiOH as base the yield of 17 from 253 mg (1.5 mmol) of 15 with LiOH was 147 mg (0.48 mmol, 32%), and with NaOH as base the yield of 17 from 100 mg (0.60 mmol) of 15 was 65 mg (0.48 mmol, 35%). Compound 17: 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 1.60 (3H, s, H10′), 1.68 (3H, s, H-9′), 1.82 (3H, s, H-8′), 2.10 (4H, m, H-4′, H-5′), 2.67 (3H, s, −COCH3), 3.37 (2H, d, J = 7.1 Hz, H-1′), 5.05 (1H, m, H-6′), 5.25 (1H, H-2′), 5.85 (1H, s, H-5); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 100 MHz) δ 16.2, 17.7, 21.5, 25.7, 26.2, 32.9, 39.7, 95.3, 105.2, 105.4, 121.4, 123.6, 132.2, 140.1, 161.2, 203.6; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 305.1744 (calcd for C18H25O4+ 305.1747), [M + Na]+ m/z 327.1539 (calcd for C18H24NaO4+ 327.1567). Synthesis of 18. Standard procedure A was used with LiOH as base. The yield of 18 from 101 mg (0.60 mmol) of 15 was 61 mg (0.16 mmol, 27%). Compound 18: light yellow powder; UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 214 (4.21), 291 (4.19) nm; 1H NMR (CD3OD, 400 MHz) δ 1.54 (3H, s, H-15′), 1.56 (3H, s, H-14′), 1.65 (3H, s, H-13′), 1.79 (3H, s, H-12′), 1.97 (8H, m, H-4′, H-5′, H-8′, H-9′), 2.59 (3H, s −COCH3), 3.18 (2H, d, J = 7.1 Hz, H-1′), 5.05 (2H, m, H-6′, H-10′), 5.17 (1H, m, H2′), 5.89 (1H, s, H-5); 13C NMR (CD3OD, 100 MHz) δ 14.7, 14.7, 16.3, 20.6, 24.5, 26.0, 26.3, 31.4, 39.4, 39.4, 93.3, 104.1, 106.5, 123.3, 123.9, 124.1, 130.4, 133.0, 134.3, 160.4, 162.5, 163.4, 203.1; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 373.2366 (calcd for C23H33O4+ 373.2373), [M + Na]+ m/z 395.2169 (calcd for C23H32NaO4+ 395.2193). Synthesis of Mallotojaponin C (1). Standard procedure B was used with 3 mL of CH3CN and HCl instead of H2SO4. The yield of 1 from 26.2 mg (0.1 mmol) of 11 was 6.1 mg (0.011 mmol, 10%). Mallotojaponin C (1): light yellow powder; 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 1.68 (6H, s, H3-5′, H3-5″), 1.77 (6H, s, H3-4′, H3-4″) 2.70 (6H, s, 2 × −COCH3) 3.31 (4H, d, J = 6.5 Hz, H2-1′, H2-1″), 3.68 (2H, s, H2-5a), 3.98 (2 × −OCH3, 6H, s), 5.21 (2H, m, H-2′, H-2″), 9.06 (2H, s, −OH), 13.49 (2H, s, −OH); HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 513.2469 (calcd for C29H37O8+ 513.2483), [M + Na]+ m/z 535.2297 (calcd for C29H36O8Na+ 535.2302). Synthesis of 5. Standard procedure B was used with 3 mL of MeOH replacing CH3CN. The reaction mixture was stirred for 16 h at rt. The residue was purified utilizing silica gel CC (1:1 hexanes/ EtOAc). The yield of 5 from 100 mg (0.55 mmol) of 10 was 53.7 mg (0.14 mmol, 26%). Compound 5: 1H NMR (DMSO-d6, 400 MHz) δ 2.56 (6H, s −COCH3), 3.61 (2H, s, H-5a), 3.69 (6H, s, −OCH3), 6.00 (2H, s, H3), 10.87 (2H, s, −OH), 13.48 (2H, s, −OH); 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 100 MHz) 15.2, 30.7, 32.7, 39.5, 55.4, 90.2, 104.4, 160.8, 162.3, 163.9, 203.1; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 377.1197 (calcd for C19H21O8+ 377.1231), [M + Na]+ m/z 399.1020 (calcd for C19H20NaO8+ 399.1050). Synthesis of 6. Standard procedure B was used. The yield of 6 from 49.9 mg (0.16 mmol) of 12 was 2.2 mg (0.0034 mmol, 2%). Compound 6: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 204 (4.32), 289 (3.95) nm; 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 1.56 (6H, s, H-10′), 1.63 (6H, s, H-9′), 1.77 (6H, s, H-8′), 1.98 (4H, m, H-5′), 2.05 (4H, bt, J = 7.4 Hz, H-4′), 2.70 (6H, s, −COCH3), 3.31 (4H, d, J = 6.9 Hz, H-1′), 3.68 (2H, s, H-5a), 3.97 (6H, s, −OCH3), 5.04 (2H, m, H-6′), 5.22 (2H, m, H-2′), 9.09 (2H, s, −OH), 13.47 (2H, s, −OH); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 100 MHz) δ 16.2, 17.7, 22.7, 25.7, 26.6, 33.7, 39.6, 62.8, 108.4, 109.0, 114.1, 122.6, 124.2, 131.3, 135.7, 157.4, 159.6, 162.7, 205.3; HRESIMS [M − H]+ m/z 647.3663 (calcd for C19H27O8+ 647.3579). Synthesis of 7. Standard procedure B was used. The yield of 7 from 12.1 mg (0.045 mmol) of 14 was 6.2 mg (0.011 mmol, 25%). Compound 7: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 213 (4.33), 287 (4.25), 354 (3.70) nm; 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 1.37 (12H, s, H-4′, H5′), 1.74 (4H, t, J = 6.7 Hz, H-2′), 2.63 (6H, s, 2 × −COCH3), 2.66 (4H, t, J = 6.8 Hz, H-1′, H-1″), 3.65 (2 × −OCH3, 6H, s), 3.94 (H-5a, 2H, s), 13.80 (−OH, 2H, s); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 100 MHz) δ 17.1,

27.0, 31.9, 33.8, 60.3, 75.6, 104.8, 108.2, 114.4, 155.2, 162.7, 163.4, 204.4. Synthesis of 8. Standard procedure B was used. The reaction mixture was stirred for 30 min at rt. The precipitate was filtered and rinsed with MeOH to yield 8. The yield of 8 from 14.3 mg (0.061 mmol) of 16 was 3 mg (0.0062 mmol, 10%). The compound appeared to be >90% pure by 1H NMR spectroscopy. Compound 8: 1H NMR (DMSO-d6, 400 MHz) δ 1.59 (6H, s, H-5′, H-5″), 1.68 (6H, s, H-4′, H-4″), 2.63 (6H, s, 2 × −COCH3,), 3.23 (4H, d, J = 6.7 Hz, H-1′, H-1″), 3.68 (2H, s, H-5a), 5.04 (2H, m, H-2′, H-2″); 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 100 MHz) δ 17.0, 17.8, 21.5, 25.5, 32.6, 48.6, 105.8, 106.4, 108.1, 123.0, 130.4, 159.5, 203.7; HRESIMS [M + H]+ m/z 485.2140 (calcd for C27H33O8+ 485.2170), [M + Na]+ m/z 507.1946 (calcd for C27H32O8Na+ 507.1989). Synthesis of 9. Standard procedure B was used. The yield of 9 from 49.3 mg (0.16 mmol) of 17 was 10.5 mg (0.017 mmol, 11%). Attempts at recrystallizing the compound in MeOH/H2O were unsuccessful and resulted in decomposition before MS data could be obtained. Compound 9: UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 208 (4.27), 230 (4.17), 292 (4.11) nm; 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 1.60 (6H, s, H-10′, H10″), 1.68 (6H, s, H-9′, H-9″), 1.83 (6H, s, H-8′, H-8″), 2.11 (8H, m, H-4′, H-5′, H-4″, H-5″), 2.67 (2 × −COCH3, 6H, s), 3.41 (4H, d, J = 6.7 Hz, H-1′, H-1″), 3.79 (2H, s, H-5a,), 5.05 (2H, m, H-6′, H-6″), 5.21 (2H, m, H-2′, H-2″); partial 13C NMR (CDCl3, 100 MHz) δ 16.2, 17.7, 25.7, 26.2, 32.7, 39.6, 105.7, 121.4, 123.4, 132.2, 140.7, 204.2.

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b00347. 1 H and 13C NMR spectra of compounds 5−9, 11−14, and 16−18, 1H NMR spectra of 1 and 5, and HPLC chromatograms of 11−13 and 16−18 (PDF)

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*Tel (D. G. I. Kingston): +1-540-231-6570. Fax: +1-540-2313255. E-mail: [email protected]. Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was supported by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, NIH, under award 1 R01 AT008088-01; this support is gratefully acknowledged. This work was also supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. CHE-0619382 for purchase of the Bruker Avance 500 NMR spectrometer and Grant No. CHE-0722638 for the purchase of the Agilent 6220 mass spectrometer. We thank Mr. B. Bebout for obtaining the mass spectra.

■

REFERENCES

(1) Biodiversity Conservation and Drug Discovery in Madagascar, Part 68. For Part 67, see: Su, Q.; Wiedle; Brodie, P. J.; Liu, Y.; Miller, J. S.; Andrianjafy, N. M.; Rakotobe, E.; Antsiferana, R.; Rasamison, V. E.; Kingston, D. G. I. Nat. Prod. Bioprospect. 2016, 6, 31−39. (2) Harinantenaina, L.; Bowman, J. D.; Brodie, P. J.; Slebodnick, C.; Callmander, M. W.; Rakotobe, E.; Randrianaivo, R.; Rasamison, V. E.; Gorka, A.; Roepe, P. D.; Cassera, M. B.; Kingston, D. G. I. J. Nat. Prod. 2013, 76, 388−393.

D

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b00347 J. Nat. Prod. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Natural Products

Article

(3) Bharate, S. B.; Bhutani, K. K.; Khan, S. I.; Tekwani, B. L.; Jacob, M. R.; Khan, I. A.; Singh, I. P. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2006, 14, 1750− 1760. (4) Bharate, S. B.; Khan, S. I.; Yunus, N. A.; Chauthe, S. K.; Jacob, M. R.; Tekwani, B. L.; Khan, I. A.; Singh, I. P. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15, 87−96. (5) Verotta, L.; Appendino, G.; Bombardelli, E.; Brun, R. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2007, 17, 1544−1548. (6) Kabran, F. A.; Okpekon, T. A.; Roblot, F.; Seon-Meniel, B.; Leblanc, K.; Bories, C.; Champy, P.; Yolou, S. F.; Loiseau, P. M.; Djakoure, L. A.; Figadere, B.; Maciuk, A. Fitoterapia 2015, 107, 100− 104. (7) Eaton, A. L. Isolation and Synthesis of Bioactive Compounds from Plants. Ph.D. Dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2015; pp 88−109. URL: http://hdl. handle.net/10919/64367. (8) Grayfer, T. D.; Grellier, P.; Mouray, E.; Dodd, R. H.; Dubois, J.; Cariou, K. Org. Lett. 2016, 18, 708−711. (9) Gissot, A.; Wagner, A.; Mioskowski, C. Tetrahedron 2004, 60, 6807−6812. (10) Raikar, S. B.; Nuhant, P.; Delpech, B.; Marazano, C. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2008, 2008, 1358−1369. (11) Balani, S. K.; Gupta, R. K.; Krishnamurti, M. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 1980, 57, 1238−1239. (12) Sharma, V. K.; Gupta, S. R. Acta Chim. Hung. 1983, 113, 93−95. (13) Hossain, M. A.; Salehuddin, S. M. Indian J. Chem., Sect. B: Org. Chem. Incl. Med. Chem. 2002, 41, 2399−2401. (14) Vogel, S.; Heilmann, J. J. Nat. Prod. 2008, 71, 1237−1241. (15) Diller, R. A.; Riepl, H. M.; Rose, O.; Frias, C.; Henze, G.; Prokop, A. Chem. Biodiversity 2005, 2, 1331−1337. (16) Lee, Y. R.; Li, X.; Kim, J. H. J. Org. Chem. 2008, 73, 4313−4316. (17) Basabe, P.; de Roman, M.; Marcos, I. S.; Diez, D.; Blanco, A.; Bodero, O.; Mollinedo, F.; Sierra, B. G.; Urones, J. G. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2010, 45, 4258−4269. (18) Sun, Q.; Schmidt, S.; Tremmel, M.; Heilmann, J.; Konig, B. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 2014, 85, 621−628. (19) Huang, C.; Zhang, Z.; Li, Y. J. Nat. Prod. 1998, 61, 1283−1285. (20) Wang, X.; Lee, Y. R. Tetrahedron 2011, 67, 9179−9184. (21) McGookin, A.; Robertson, A.; Simpson, T. H. J. Chem. Soc. 1951, 2021−2029. (22) Chauthe, S. K.; Bharate, S. B.; Sabde, S.; Mitra, D.; Bhutani, K. K.; Singh, I. P. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2010, 18, 2029−2036. (23) Minassi, A.; Cicione, L.; Koeberle, A.; Bauer, J.; Laufer, S.; Werz, O.; Appendino, G. Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2012, 2012, 772−779.

E

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.6b00347 J. Nat. Prod. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX